Ca FFL ACCESS TO FBI NICS [2-?]

[pacrat]

As part of GCA 68, ATF requires all FFL DEALER TRANSFERRED firearms pass an FBI NICS BG check on the buyer.

Typically these NICS BG checks take a matter of just a few minutes.

And are done by the FFL directly contacting the FBI by phone.

NOW THE CRUX OF MY QUESTIONS.

If DOJ delays a transfer after filing a DROS. And that delay [as is becoming more common] becomes "undetermined" at the end of the maximum state allowable 30 DAY delay.

WHY CAN'T A CA FFL, SIMPLY PICK UP THE PHONE, CALL FBI, TO GET THE NICS # REQUIRED FOR THE RELEASE/DELIVERY on the 4473 FORM?

JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER STATE DOES, WITHOUT THE DELAY.

IS THERE A CA STATUTE, OR ASININE DOJ REGULATION DISALLOWING CA FFLs FROM DOING THIS?

[Librarian]

PC 28220 - https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...ctionNum=28220.

It does not say that dealers cannot do that, it says the the DOJ will do it.

28220.

(a) (1) Upon submission of firearm purchaser information, the Department of Justice shall examine its records, as well as those records that it is authorized to request from the State Department of State Hospitals pursuant to Section 8104 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, in order to determine if the purchaser is a person described in subdivision (a) of Section 27535, or is prohibited by state or federal law from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm.

(2) Commencing July 1, 2025, for the sale or transfer of a firearm to a person under 21 years of age pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 27510, the Department of Justice shall verify the validity of the purchaser’s hunting license with the Department of Fish and Wildlife.

(b) The Department of Justice shall participate in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), as described in subsection (t) of Section 922 of Title 18 of the United States Code, and shall notify the dealer and the chief of the police department of the city or city and county in which the sale was made, or if the sale was made in a district in which there is no municipal police department, the sheriff of the county in which the sale was made, that the purchaser is a person prohibited from acquiring a firearm under federal law.

CA has argued NICS is not sufficient. Someplace around here is testimony from a lawsuit where DOJ described the process of doing the background check.

Seems to be part of Silviera - see http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=924856

[pacrat]

OK, I was aware of, and familiar with, the aspects of 28220.

From your link of the Silvester post.

^^^ALSO^^^ one reason for my questions.

Since "if" the desk monkeys at DOJ initiate the NICS BG check several days AFTER application. Then that NICS check still has time left on its 30 day clock, when the DROS delay goes undetermined at 720 Hrs.

Since [typically/generally], a PC, or State Agency Regulation. Tells a party either, WHAT THEY CAN'T DO. ........... OR, WHAT THEY MUST DO. With very few exceptions, such as CVC, "right turn on red" example.

Makes me believe, without further evidence to the contrary. That there is nothing to stop a FFL from contacting FBI, getting the # from them, writing it on the 4473, and as per 28220 [4]. Immediately transferring the firearm to the purchaser.

[jeremiah12]

Here is a link to the map that will explain the situation:

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/nics-participation-map.pdf

California is one of 13 states where a state agency is the designated point of contact with the FBI for all firearms background checks. The FFL is required to go through the designated state agency and is not allowed to go through the FBI and so has no way to contact the FBI to run a NICS background check and getting a number from them.

In 37 non-POC states, the states let the FFLs go directly to the FBI for the background check.

The partial-contact states have the FFL run the background check through a state agency for handguns and the FBI for long guns.

I do not know if this is true but I was told that CA does not share its mental health information with the FBI due to CA privacy laws for medical information being much stricter than the federal laws. This means someone can be prohibited in CA due to mental health issues but not prohibited if they were to move to a different state because CA does not share the mental health records with the FBI database.

When NV first passed a law to have private party transfers be processed through a FFL, it was ruled to not be possible by the AG at the time because the FBI would not let FFLs run a background check for private party transfers. They considered it a violation of privacy. It could only be done for sales from the FFL inventory.

So NV had to try again and the second time, they had to change the law so the state ran the background checks. The FBI would allow state agencies to have access to the NICS system. This is the only way for states to have background checks for private party transfers.

[pacrat]

Thank you Jeremiah. Now we know why Ca FFLs CAN'T CONTACT FBI DIRECTLY FOR NICS #.